Tax pool penalty – payments from income / capital

I have been asked to comment on a large income tax liability incurred by the trustees of a discretionary trust created in a Will, but I am going round in circles, so would appreciate any words of wisdom from members of the forum please!

The trust was created during tax year 22/23 and contains a rental property and some cash, the total value of which are within the NRB. The trustees have power to pay or apply income and capital for the benefit of the beneficiaries, as well as the usual powers to accumulate income and wide powers of appointment.

Since the trust started, the trustees have paid the whole of the gross rent they have received each month to two of the beneficiaries, with the intention that any income tax and property related expenses would be paid from the capital cash in the trust. It has now come to light that this arrangement may have breached the tax pool and landed the trustees with an unexpected tax bill.

The trustees have an accountant who prepares their annual trust tax returns, R185’s and accounts. The accountant was made aware that the rent would all be distributed and the income tax etc would be paid from the capital cash, but did not at this stage advise the trustees that this would create any additional tax burden for them.

When the accountant prepared the tax return and accounts for 22/23, they also did not specifically advise the trustees that their actions meant that an income tax penalty (tax pool adjustment) of £1,500 formed part of their tax bill, or advise them what steps to take to ensure this didn’t happen in the following year.

In 23/24, one of the beneficiaries approached the trustees and asked if they could receive a lump sum equal to several months’ rent “up front” to use as a house deposit. The trustees were willing (in principle) to facilitate this, but did not have any accumulated income to pay this from, so it was assumed that the payment would have to be made from the capital cash. The accountant was asked to confirm their agreement with this approach, but advised that HMRC would treat this as an income payment, as the beneficiary had received income previously, so was entitled to it, irrespective of the fact this is a discretionary trust.

The trustees therefore signed their first and only Resolution, to confirm their decision to pay the lump sum to the beneficiary using their power to apply income, to stop making payments of income to her for X months and then recommence them at the end of that period, until such time as they determined otherwise. They also confirmed their decision to continue paying income to the second beneficiary.

The accountant has now prepared the tax return and accounts for 23/24 which has revealed large negative balance on the income account and a huge income tax liability, as there was an insufficient balance in the tax pool to frank the “income payments” that were made during the tax year.

I have considered this for the trustees, but cannot understand how the lump sum payment can have been made to the beneficiary from income and feel it must have been made from capital. Each month, the trustees had distributed all of the income to the beneficiaries leaving a nil balance on the income account so, presumably, any payment they made can only have been made from capital? I think the Resolution was therefore incorrect as the trustees simply did not have the funds available to them to resolve to pay the lump sum from income.

I am minded to suggest that the trustees sign some sort of “corrective Resolution” to confirm the trust position and then disclose both to HMRC and ask them to confirm that they agree with our interpretation, but the accountant does not feel this would work. The alternative would be to approach Counsel for advice.

Am I missing something obvious here? Is it possible to end the tax year with a negative balance on the income account and therefore effectively incur a tax liability for breaching the tax pool based on the fact it was a distribution of “future income”? Or is it not simply a matter of fact that the lump sum payment must have been made from capital as there was no accumulated income in the trust?

Hi Anna

If the trustees are distributing the gross rents to the beneficiaries each year, then this will (and has by the sounds of it) result in the income account becoming overdrawn by the amount of the rental expenses and trust tax liability. The latter will include the tax pool charge.

In my experience (as an accountant), the income account can occasionally become overdrawn if set distributions are being made and expected income levels fall during the year. This would usually be rectified by cutting back on future distributions to bring the income account back into the black.

In your case, it would appear that the distributions are knowingly exceeding the trust income on a regular basis, and this would suggest that part of the distributions are of capital rather than income.

Re. the comments made by the accountant re. HMRC’s treatment of the “up front” payment as income, the HMRC manuals from TSEM 3781 onwards might help : TSEM3785 sets out some circumstances where capital payments can be treated as income, which could apply to your circumstances.

My view would probably differ from the accountants’ that you mention - it seems to me that the lump sum payment was made from capital cash, unless this was replenished by the forthcoming months rental income not being paid to the beneficiary?

I would be uncomfortable in treating future income as distributed before it is received - this could cause all sorts of issues (what if the income isn’t actually received, what if the beneficiary dies having received more income than arose to the trust etc).

I agree largely with Neil’s comments. The accounting and the tax treatment can be at odds with each other where a capital payment is ‘deemed’ income for the beneficiary as discussed within TSEM3785. In these cases, my understanding is that you would account for it as a capital distribution but for tax purposes it would be deemed an income distribution so affecting the tax pool and the way the beneficiary declares it.

However, what the accountant advised was not to even consider making a capital distribution, which is not the full story. A DT can still make capital distributions (if the deed allows) even where income payments have been made as long as it is clearly documented and is intended to be separate to the income payments. There was clearly a discussion to be had around why what they were doing was tricky from a tax perspective with a discussion on the deemed income point and a chat around whether they wanted this to be an advance on income or a separate capital distribution. As it is, they have documented it as an income payment from the Trustees perspective so from an accounting perspective it can’t be treated as anything else and it would certainly be treated as income from HMRC’s perspective given it was documented as an advance income payment not a capital payment.

The Tax pool is a separate element to the above and can highlight the difference between engaging someone to just fill in the Trust return and engaging them to give advice. I often see Trustees engage the cheapest they can to prepare the accounts/just fill in the return and then wonder why they haven’t been notified that what they are doing isn’t tax effective.

Thank you both for your replies, they are really helpful and much appreciated.